The traits with the greatest relative importance (>0.95) are maximum body size, minimum depth, and depth range.
After accounting for maximum body size and minimum depth, species with narrower depth ranges have a 1.2% greater threat risk per 100 m narrowing of depth range.
They found that the most useful factors for determining if a particular species had an elevated risk of extinction was its maximum body size, the minimum depth of water in which it lived, and the range of depth with larger species and those that swim in shallower waters having the largest risk.
For the morphological features measured, Theriault et al. [69] found significant heritabilities only for pelvic fin length (0.40) and maximum body width (0.28); notably, peduncle depth heritability was not significant in Theriault et al. [69], but relative warps that explained variation in this feature were significantly heritable in our study.
We used maximum body length (cm), geographic range size (Extent of Occurrence, km), and depth range (maximum minimum depth, m) as indices of intrinsic sensitivity, and minimum depth (m) and mean depth (maximum minimum depth/2) as a measure of exposure to fishing activity.
Probability that a species is threatened due to the combination of intrinsic life history sensitivity (maximum body size, cm total length, TL) and accessibility to fisheries which is represented as minimum depth limit, depth range, and geographic range size (Extent of Occurrence).
The probability that a species is threatened increases by 1.2% for each 10 cm increase in maximum body length, and decreases by 10.3% for each 50 m deepening in the minimum depth limit of species.
Pore body depth of etching (μm).
Maximum body temperature was 38.7 °C.
